R v Petot & Martin
[2005] VSC 112
•22 April 2005
| IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA | Not Restricted | |
AT SHEPPARTON
CRIMINAL DIVISION
No. 1476 of 2004
| THE QUEEN |
| v |
| SEAN MICHAEL PETOT and DAMIEN ROBERT MARTIN |
---
JUDGE: | KAYE J. | |
WHERE HELD: | SHEPPARTON | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 28 February and 21 April 2005 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 22 April 2005 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Petot and Martin | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2005] VSC 112 | |
---
CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Murder.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mr C. Hillman S.C. | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused Sean Michael Petot | Mr P. Casey | Stella Stuthridge & Associates |
| For the Accused Damien Robert Martin | Mr G. Steward | Victoria Legal Aid |
HIS HONOUR:
The two prisoners may remain seated while I read out my reasons for sentence. They will be lengthy, that I would ask that they rise when I come to sentence them, please.
Sean Michael Petot, you have pleaded guilty to the murder of Adrian Joseph Power at Shepparton on 24 October 2003.
Damien Robert Martin, you have been found guilty by a jury empanelled upon your trial in this court of the murder of Adrian Joseph Power.
At that time, you, Sean Petot, had known Adrian Power for more than three years and you had become close friends. Initially you knew him when you were both living in Eaglehawk. In 2002 Power went to Melbourne. A few months later you split up from your girlfriend and joined Power in Melbourne. Both of you were living on the streets and as squatters in the derelict old Chevron Hotel.
A few days before the murder Power and Petot met and befriended you, Damien Martin. The three of you then travelled to Shepparton by bus. Your intention was to obtain work as fruit pickers. On 22 October the three of you booked into the Midpark Caravan Park on the Midland Highway where you resided until the day of the murder.
On 24 October in the afternoon the three of you went shopping at the Safeway food store in Shepparton. There you purchased a number of items which you placed in a shopping trolley. Later, shortly before 7.00 p.m., complaints were made to the police that two of you had been playing chicken with oncoming traffic in the vicinity of Daish's Bridge on the Midland Highway, while you were pushing the shopping trolley back to the caravan park at Mooroopna. The police attended and spoke to you. They noted that you, Petot, had been consuming alcohol and were noticeably affected by it. You were very talkative and could not keep still. You, Martin, were observed to be very quiet and not affected by alcohol. For your own safety the police directed you to a bitumen bicycle track which ran adjacent to the highway. At the time the police did not notice anything untoward between the three of you, other than that Adrian Power was apparently walking some distance ahead of you and appeared to be in somewhat of a “huff”.
It seems that very shortly after the three of you left the roadway to walk along the bicycle track that an incident erupted between you. Whatever occurred, it resulted in a most vicious brutal and violent beating being meted out to Adrian Power.
In the course of the attack Power was stabbed at least 55 times. He was also kicked, punched and struck with a rod to the face, head and upper torso. It was not until the next day that his body was found secreted a short distance from the track. The autopsy which was conducted upon him revealed an extensive number of injuries which had been inflicted upon him, particularly to his head, face, neck, abdomen and chest. When you, Petot, were arrested by the police on 8 November you told them that you had stabbed Power with a knife blade and a nail file blade which was attached to a key ring. The autopsy revealed that he had some 32 stab wounds to the neck, including one which punctured his jugular vein. They were mainly clustered over the centre and right of the front of his neck. The position of some of the wounds suggests that they had been inflicted while Power was on the ground. In your plea, Petot, I was told that you admitted to sitting astride Power and striking him with the knife while he was on the ground. In the course of the autopsy the knife was found embedded in his lower right jaw.
There were also 15 stab wounds to Power's chest, five of which penetrated his thoracic cavity. Two of those wounds extended into the right lung which slightly collapsed. In addition there were a further nine stab wounds to the abdomen.
In addition to the stab wounds it was clear that Power had been subjected to a large number of blows, particularly to his head and upper body brought about by kicking, punching and striking with a firm rod-like object. His head had been stomped on. He had a fractured skull and a brain haemorrhage. There were a considerable number of blunt force injuries over his face, shoulders, chest and arms.
Early the next day the two of you attempted to use Power's Bank of Melbourne and Commonwealth Bank cards in order to access his accounts. You then hitchhiked together to Bendigo where you stayed with a friend in Eaglehawk. After a few days, you, Martin, left and returned to your home in Adelaide. You, Petot, were arrested by the police on 8 November in Eaglehawk. You, Martin, were arrested on 27 December 2003 in Adelaide.
When you, Sean Petot, were first interviewed by the police you told them that you had had a “blue” and that “things just got out of hand”. You verbally admitted to the police that you had been responsible for killing Adrian Power and that you had done so using the knife and nail file to which I have referred. In the formal record of interview you did not adopt that admission, but rather chose to invoke your right to silence. However, you did tell the police that after you had been shopping the three of you had stopped at the river and had started drinking wine and that you had got “blind drunk”. You told the police that after that "it's all a blur".
In the plea that was made on your behalf by Mr Casey, I was told that you still do not have significant recollection of what happened. You recall drinking the wine, which you had purchased at the supermarket, very quickly while you were at the river side. You recall being intercepted by the police and then walking down the track. You recall having the trolley pole in your hand and swinging it about in the grass. You also recall sitting astride the deceased and stabbing him. You do not recall stomping on him or striking him with the pole but do not deny that you did so. Thus, to your credit, you have not sought, either when you spoke to the police or now, to shift the blame on to Martin or to minimise your own responsibility for your friend's death.
There is no direct evidence as to the role which you, Damien Martin, played in the killing of Adrian Power. In the record of interview conducted on you by members of the homicide squad, you chose to rely on your right to remain silent when you were asked questions about the circumstances in which Adrian Power died. At your trial the Crown case was that Petot and you acted in concert in the murder of Adrian Power or, alternatively, that you aided and abetted Petot in the murder or, conversely, that Petot aided and abetted you in the murder of Adrian Power. In essence, the Crown case was that both you and Petot were actively involved in the attack which caused Power's death and that you both intended to kill him or, at the very least, to cause him really serious injury.
It is evident that the jury accepted the Crown's case and accepted that you were physically involved with Petot in the attack on Power which led to his death and that you acted with the intention of killing Power or, at the very least, causing him really serious injury. There was evidence at your trial which not only connected you with the murder of Power, but which also satisfies me beyond reasonable doubt that you were physically involved in the attack which led to the death of Power. As I have stated, Power was subjected to an extraordinary number of blows. Those blows were inflicted by a variety of mechanisms, including punching, striking with a rod, kicking, stomping and stabbing. It was a prolonged attack. The blood of Adrian Power was found on the front of your shirt and also on the cuffs of the jumper which you were then wearing about your waist. Those factors combined persuade me that you joined in and physically participated in the attack on Power.
It was submitted by Mr Steward on your behalf that you played a significantly lesser role in the attack on Power than did Petot, and that I should accept that you are less culpable for the attack than Petot. As I have observed, Petot has acknowledged full responsibility for the attack. He has not sought to minimise his guilt by blaming you. However, that does not mean that you are any less blameworthy for the attack on and murder of Adrian Power. Certainly I accept that it was Petot who repeatedly stabbed Power. On the other hand, as I have stated, consistently with the verdict of the jury, I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that you yourself were also physically involved in the fatal attack on Adrian Power.
Apart from Petot's concession that he did the stabbing and that at one stage he held the bar of the shopping trolley, there is no evidence as to what actions either of you may or may not have carried out. It is purely speculative whether you played such a lesser role in the attack that I should not consider you, Martin, equally blameworthy for it. There is no evidence from which I can draw any such conclusion. On the contrary, the nature and the severity of the attack is such that, given the jury's verdict, I accept that you were criminally and physically involved in an horrific and appallingly fatal beating of a helpless young man. In those circumstances, regardless of who struck which blow, it is only appropriate that I consider both of you equally blameworthy for Adrian Power's murder.
The offence on which I must sentence you both, murder, is the most serious offence known to our criminal justice system, involving the intentional taking of the life of another person. In this case the offence was attended by an extraordinary amount of violence of a most vicious type. The attack which you both launched on Adrian Power involved repeated blows with a dangerous implement. Power was clearly helpless to resist your frenzied aggression. For him it must have been a terrifying ordeal. Until he was rendered unconscious he must have suffered considerable pain and trauma. It was a most cruel end to his short life.
The circumstances of this offence are such that I regard this as a serious instance of the crime of murder. I have had the opportunity to read the victim impact statement of the mother of Adrian Power. She has suffered the irreplaceable loss of her only child. Her statement bears eloquent testimony to the enduring pain, grief and anguish which is the inevitable and tragic consequence of the type of violent and wanton murder of which you are both guilty.
I now turn to consider matters relating to the background of each of you and in particular, relating to matters of mitigation of sentence.
I commence by considering the background of you, Sean Michael Petot. The killing by you Petot of your friend, is on the face of it, a senseless act, which is almost impossible to understand. I agree with the submission of Mr Casey on your behalf, that some explanation for it is to be found in your background and your own unfortunate history.
You were born on 7 September 1982. At the time of the offence, you were 21 years of age and you are now 22 and a half years of age. Your early years were marked by a dysfunctional family life, in which you had little, if any, parental guidance. You never knew your father. You have two older half brothers, who were approximately ten years your senior. You have a half sister, who is four years younger than you. By the time you were seven years of age, your two brothers had left home. Your mother was working, having been left by her most recent partner. In those circumstances, you were left to your own devices, with little or no parental supervision.
When you attended school, you had a hard time being bullied, because you were small in stature. You did not do well at school and in secondary school, got into an amount of trouble. Ultimately, you were expelled from school at the age of 14 at year 9 level. Shortly thereafter, your mother sent you to Queensland to live with your brother, who, she hoped, could provide you with some supervision. However, he was in the army and the arrangement did not work well.
When you returned home, you stayed with your mother for some time, until you obtained work picking fruit. You then went to Bendigo. While you were there in May 2000, your mother died suddenly, apparently of a stroke. You obtained work as a plasterer and remained in that employment for some time.
During the same period of time, you had a girlfriend, with whom you formed a solid relationship. It was also during this period, that you met and became a close friend of Adrian Power. When your relationship with your girlfriend broke down in 2003, you moved to Melbourne and joined Adrian Power there.
The most relevant feature of your background concerns your abuse of alcohol and drugs, from an early age. I was told that you had commenced using alcohol at the extraordinarily young age of four years. From your early teens, you also extensively used illicit drugs, including cannabis, amphetamines and heroin. In addition, you abused prescription medication.
Your abuse of alcohol continued up to the day of the offence. It appears that you were a binge drinker, given to drinking heavily and in excess on occasions. You described to the psychiatrist, who examined you and who has provided a report, that your drinking during your teen years progressed to the stage, where you would experience blackouts almost each weekend.
As I have stated, it appears that shortly before this incident, you had been drinking heavily. Each of the three police who saw you in the vicinity of Daish's Bridge, noted that you were affected by alcohol. I was told on your plea, that when you stopped at the river bank, the three of you drank a cask of wine, over a period of ten minutes.
In those circumstances, I do accept that at the time you committed the offence, you were affected by alcohol. While that circumstance is not of itself a mitigating factor, it does negative any suggestion that the murder was pre-planned or cold blooded. The frenzied and vicious nature of the injuries, which were inflicted on Adrian Power, are consistent with the anger and disinhibition of persons, who do abuse alcohol, as you have.
You do have some previous convictions, primarily for offences of dishonesty and traffic offences. I regard them as having no relevance for the purposes of sentencing you today. It is particularly noteworthy, that you do not appear to have any history of violence and certainly no history of violent offending.
Dr Sullivan, the psychiatrist, who examined you, found no evidence of any psychotic disorder or gross personality disorder. He noted that there is no significant history of marked inter-personal violence, related to intoxication. Dr Sullivan correctly notes that the offence remains somewhat inexplicable, in the absence of intoxication.
You have been in custody since 8 November 2003. You were at Port Phillip Prison briefly, then at Fulham Prison, but have spent most of your time, it seems, at Barwon Prison. This is the first time that you have been in custody. Ironically and indeed tragically, as your own counsel remarked, it is the first period of your life, when you known stability and any kind of security.
It appears that you have benefited considerably from the environment in which you now find yourself. You have made genuine efforts to improve yourself. I have had tendered to me certificates that indicate that you have completed a number of educational courses, including reading and writing for self-expression and engineering technology. You have learnt to weld and you are now the welder at Barwon Prison. At that prison, you completed four sessions, equivalent to 12 hours, of the 24 hour Alchemy program, but were unable to complete the program, because you were transferred to another prison, for court matters. You have attended an anger management course. In addition, you have worked out daily in the gym and have been actively involved in sport, including cricket, tennis, badminton, billiards and table tennis.
Your counsel told me, that except for one occasion, all random urine tests have proven negative for any illicit drug use. The one occasion, on which you have tested positive, was when you were induced on your birthday, to smoke some marijuana. It is clear that you have been shaken by your involvement in the murder of your close friend and for some time you have suffered nightmares as a result. To your credit you have used your time in an endeavour to improve yourself and to gain skills which will be of benefit to you when you are ultimately released from prison.
In prison you have been assessed by Dr Newlands, the visiting psychiatrist, who has apparently diagnosed you as suffering from depression. He has commenced you on anti-depressant medication. Dr Sullivan's diagnosis is that you are suffering from a mild to moderately severe depressive disorder which was precipitated by the offence and the consequences of it.
You have accepted and continue to accept that you have murdered your friend, and you have not attempted to shift that blame onto your co-accused. I have read an account which you have give to your solicitors, and also a letter which you have prepared to be provided to Adrian Power's mother, although the document has not yet been given to her. Those documents, together with the matters which were related to me on your plea do indicate to me that you accept responsibility for what you have done and that you do now have genuine remorse for the fact that you have deprived your best friend of his life. I also accept that you are sincerely remorseful for the pain and grief which you have inflicted on Adrian's mother and for the loss of her only child.
As I have stated, the offence of murder is the most serious offence known to our legal system. In this case it was accompanied by a savage degree of violence inflicted on a helpless and defenceless victim. Although you have now shown genuine remorse for the murder of your friend, your initial reaction was to flee from the scene rather than obtaining assistance. You concealed his body and endeavoured to use his credit cards in order to make good your escape.
On the other hand, as I have already pointed out, there are a number of mitigating circumstances which I must and do take into account. First and foremost is your plea of guilty. It is in the interests of the community that those who commit violent crimes confess to them and plead guilty.
I also find that your plea of guilty is accompanied by genuine remorse on your behalf. In those circumstances it is appropriate that I reduce the sentence which I would otherwise impose on you, in order to give credit to you for the fact that you have pleaded guilty, and for your genuine remorse.
In addition I take into account the fact that your offence was not pre-planned but was entirely spontaneous and that your anger and aggression were fuelled by your excessive consumption of alcohol.
In that context I also take into account your deprived and difficult childhood and upbringing, as a consequence of which you have abused alcohol and elicit drugs for a considerable period of time. You have never had the benefit of any proper parental supervision and life has been difficult for you.
I also take into account the fact that you have taken genuine commendable and positive steps to reform yourself, to embark on a process of rehabilitation. The fact that you have used your time in prison productively bodes well for your future, and invests me with some confidence that ultimately, when you are released, you will be able to live a worthwhile life in our community. Your period of work as a plasterer shows that you are capable of holding regular employment in the community.
At the time of the offence you were a young man. You are still young. You will spend what may be regarded as the best years of your life in gaol. I do regard this as a case in which your youth at the time of the offence and now should be taken into account as a mitigating factor.
If it were not for those mitigating circumstances the sentence which I would impose on you would be significantly more substantial than the sentence I shall shortly pronounce.
I now turn to consider the matters of background and personal circumstances of you, Damien Robert Martin.
You were born in Adelaide on 13 July 1982, and accordingly at the time of the offence were 21 years of age. Your early years were marked by family instability. You have lived an itinerant life, rarely having the opportunity to settle in any location or develop any stable lifestyle.
Your parents separated when you were six months old. You did not meet your biological father until you were nine years of age. In the meantime your mother had remarried. Your stepfather was a violent man who was particularly strict with you. Your mother and stepfather had two children and you consider that they received favourable treatment in contrast to that of yourself and your other brother. Your mother and your stepfather separated when you were at the age of 12. After that your mother had another relationship but that did not last.
While you were living with your mother and stepfather you lived at various addresses in Adelaide and then in Queensland. Apparently this was because your stepfather was trying to avoid the police and debt collectors. At one stage the family moved back to Adelaide, where you commenced to reside with your biological father. In the meantime your mother and stepfather had moved to Queensland, where they separated.
Because of all of the moves of your family your education was disrupted. You attended various schools in Queensland, Tasmania and South Australia. You commenced your secondary education in Queensland but completed it while living with your father in Adelaide. You ceased school while you were in the middle of Year 11.
After leaving school you moved to the Riverina where you worked picked grapes. You then moved to North Queensland, lived with your mother and worked on a banana plantation. When your mother moved to Sydney with her boyfriend you accompanied her. There you obtained work as a painter and decorator in Sydney for 12 months. You then went to Adelaide and worked in a factory for 14 months at Mount Barker. Then you went with your brother to Myrtleford and worked on a tobacco farm. You then moved to North Queensland to live with your mother. There you worked on mango plantations. You then went to Innisfail and worked on a banana plantation. Again you returned to Myrtleford and worked in the tobacco industry. In August 2003 you received a term of imprisonment and were released in October 2003.
I have recited the details of your education and employment because they demonstrate that you have had a disadvantaged upbringing. Your dislocated family life has clearly impacted on you. The many moves which you were required to make as a child did not establish for you a settled or ordered way of life. That pattern has been a characteristic feature of your life since leaving school. As part and parcel of that lifestyle you have since an early age drunk alcohol and smoked cannabis. You acknowledged to Mr Ian Joblin, the forensic psychologist who assessed you in April of this year, that the abuse by you of cannabis and alcohol has been a problem since the age of 16. You have also used heroin but ceased using it some time ago.
When you were in custody between August and October 2003 you abstained from using cannabis, but on your release you resumed smoking it. You also acknowledged that between October and December 2003 you used amphetamines. Mr Joblin's opinion is that drugs and alcohol are not the primary presenting problems for you, but rather your use of those substances results from your feckless lifestyle.
You do have some previous convictions but none of them are relevant to your sentence. Importantly, none of your prior convictions involve any violence. There is nothing in your history or antecedents that suggests that you are a violent person or that you have a propensity to aggressive behaviour.
Mr Joblin, who assessed you, is of the view that you are of reasonable intellect and that you suffer no psychiatric illness. Indeed, his opinion is that your intellect is such that you should have been able to have progressed beyond being an itinerant seasonal worker. Mr Joblin considers that your previous convictions, which are relatively minor in the context of this case, do not represent an antisocial personality disorder, but rather are consistent with your lifestyle. Mr Joblin's view is that you do have problems of a psychological and psychosocial nature which are reflected in your unstable history.
Mr Joblin did note that while you have been in prison you have been seen once by a psychiatrist. You were originally prescribed antidepressants shortly after your arrest in December 2003. When you were recently interviewed by Mr Joblin you were taking another type of antidepressant medication. Mr Joblin states that at the time of his interview with you, you demonstrated a degree of depression.
Since January 2004 you have been in Port Phillip Prison. Throughout that time you have been in the Youth Unit of that prison. Ms Anne Hooker gave evidence on your behalf. She is a youth development officer at that unit. I shall set out her evidence in greater detail shortly. During her evidence she told me that throughout your time at the unit you have been prone to depressive episodes. You have on a weekly basis attended a program for prisoners who suffer depression. Ms Hooker believed that your condition preceded or predated your arrest in December 2003.
Mr Joblin was instructed not to interview you about the events of 24 October 2003. Thus his report does not assist me in the question whether at the time of the offence your depressive condition played any part in your participation in the offence. The only relevance of your depression for the purposes of sentencing you is that it is an unpleasant condition with which you will be required to cope during your time in gaol in the years ahead.
In addition, throughout your stay in prison no one has visited you apart from your counsel, your solicitor, and Mr Joblin. Your mother is in Queensland. She knows you are in gaol but does not know the outcome of the trial. Your father is believed to be in Scotland. You have had no contact with your brother with whom you were previously close. During your trial and during your plea yesterday I noted that no one, and in particular no member of your family, was present in court to support you. Thus you have been, and I apprehend will remain, isolated from and without any family or external support while you remain in gaol.
As I have stated, Ms Hooker gave evidence on your behalf. She was a most impressive witness. The gist of her evidence was that throughout your time in the Youth Unit you have made what can only be regarded as extraordinary steps to better yourself and to rehabilitate yourself. Your level of participation in programs, your behaviour and your attitude in general have all been outstanding. You are to be genuinely commended for what you have done and what you have achieved so far.
Ms Hooker told me that you have volunteered for and completed a large number of educational and training programs, well in excess of the amount required to enable you to remain in the Youth Unit. You have assisted with the courses you have attended and have not given in when they are difficult. You have, of your own volition, repeated some courses, to deepen and strengthen your understanding of what you have learnt. Your teachers, who have conducted the courses, have reported to Ms Hooker that your attitude and performance have been of a uniformly high standard. Indeed, such has been your enthusiasm for the courses, that you have taken the lead in them and you yourself, have conducted some courses for your fellow prisoners.
I am also impressed that you have undertaken an Alcoholics Anonymous program. Indeed, you have taken it upon yourself to conduct Alcoholics Anonymous sessions for other prisoners. You have also attended other drug courses. By doing so, you have demonstrated an insight into one of the major problems which has afflicted your life, namely, the abuse of illicit drugs and alcohol.
I was impressed by Ms Hooker's description of your conduct and behaviour in prison. You have developed leadership skills, taking younger and more vulnerable new inmates under your wing. Importantly, Ms Hooker has not noted any propensity on your behalf to violence. On one occasion, you resisted the urgings of others to become involved in a violent incident.
Ms Hooker's evidence was of course, more extensive than my bare summary of it, which I have given you above. What I have said is sufficient for me to find that you have behaved most commendably, since your imprisonment. You have taken strong positive steps towards your rehabilitation. In doing so, you have developed and strengthened personal qualities, such as a commitment to work, perseverance and initiative, which were not previously apparent in your lifestyle. Your conduct in gaol is a significant mitigating factor in your favour.
There are therefore a number of mitigating factors, which I take into account in your case. They are to be weighed against the grave nature of the offence, for which I must sentence you. Those mitigating factors may be summarised together as follows. First, although the killing of Adrian Power was accompanied by an extraordinarily high degree of violence, I am satisfied that there was no premeditation on your behalf or, as I have found, on Petot's behalf. All the circumstances satisfy me that whatever occurred, it involved a spontaneous outburst of violence, for which there had been no preplanning by either of you.
Second, you Martin, come from a disadvantaged background. The itinerant nature of your life was well and truly the product of your disrupted and unfortunate childhood. In turn, that lifestyle was, I believe, an integral element of your involvement in the offence.
Third, you have no prior history of violence. Fourth, at the time of the offence, you were young and immature. You are still young, but are at last gaining some maturity. Fifth, as I have found, you have made excellent efforts to improve yourself and to rehabilitate. Your behaviour in prison has been almost exemplary.
Sixth, I accept that a long term of imprisonment will be difficult for you. As I have stated, no family or friend has visited you. You have little outside support. You are prone to bouts of depression.
Of course, you do not have the benefit of a plea of guilty, nor is there any evidence of remorse by you, for the murder of Adrian Power. Through your counsel, you maintain your innocence. You must understand that your sentence is not increased, due to your plea of not guilty and your lack of remorse. However, in contrast to the case of your co-accused, Sean Petot, you Damien Martin, do not have the benefit, as mitigating circumstances, which reduce the sentence to be imposed, of a plea of guilty and remorse.
It was argued by Mr Steward on your behalf Martin, that you should receive the same sentence, which I impose on Petot. Conversely, it was argued on your behalf Sean Petot, that you Petot should receive a lower sentence, than that of Martin. In a sense, both arguments were wrong. I start by assessing the seriousness of the offence, for which as I have stated, I consider you are both equally blameworthy. Then in the case of each of you, I have assessed the mitigating circumstances, which should reduce your sentence. In the end, it does not mean that I must necessarily impose equal or unequal sentences on you both.
In conclusion then, there are mitigating circumstances, which I do take into account in reducing the sentences, which I shall impose on both of you. However, those mitigating circumstances are in the context of a serious instance of the crime of murder, which involved an appalling and horrifying degree of violence and which would otherwise require me to impose a particularly severe sentence.
In a case such as this, the consideration of general deterrence is of significance. The sentence, which I am to impose on you, must send a clear and unequivocal message to others, that the courts take a most serious view of the crime of murder, especially where, as here, it is accompanied by a vicious and wanton degree of violence.
In addition, the court must impose a sentence, which adequately expresses the court’s abhorrence and the community's revulsion, for the crime which you have both committed. It is the responsibility of the court by its sentence, to uphold and vindicate the value and sanctity of each human life and in this case, the life of Adrian Power.
Finally, the court must also take into account the need to ensure that the sentence is sufficient to deter each of you from a repetition of the type of conduct in which you indulged on the day in question. In the case of both of you, I am satisfied that your rehabilitation is well under way. Nevertheless, the need to ensure that the sentence is adequate, to specifically deter you both from further similar offending does remain, but to a diminished degree.
I now ask you both to rise while I sentence you.
Taking all those matters into account I sentence as follows.
First, I sentence Sean Michael Petot to 16 years' imprisonment. I fix a period of 12 years during which you are not eligible for parole. Pursuant to s.18 of the Sentencing Act I declare that the time that you have spent in custody by reason of this offence to be 531 days.
Damien Robert Martin, I sentence you to 18 years' imprisonment. I fix a period of 13 years during which you are not eligible for parole. Pursuant to s.18 of the Sentencing Act I declare that the time you have spent in custody by reason of this offence is 480 days.
Would you please remove the prisoners.
---
0
0
0